Those Life Changing Three Little Words – Elanora Players

Three Little Words

Three Little Words Rating

Click if you liked this article

Australian Playwright Joanna Murray-Smith’s choice of “Three Little Words” for a title about two couples’ friendship is an interesting one. Initially I assumed that those three little words alluded to “I Love You”. However by the end of the play I realised that those three little words could be interpreted as to whatever the audience thinks – and this was a very clever prelude to a witty script performed by four engaging actors from the Elanora Players.

Tess (Tracey Keene) and Curtis (Paul Sheldon) have invited their long-time besties for dinner on their 20-year anniversary. After reminiscing good naturedly about the many good times and the way they met, Tess and Curtis announce a bombshell in the form of three little words, “We’re Splitting Up”. Bonnie (Karen Oughtred) and her partner Annie (Chantal Harrison) are disbelieving and shocked. The shaking up of what they thought was an unbreakable bond between the four friends sets off a split between all of them, and we are witness to the devastation that unravels.

Tess wants to explore her own identity, apart from being a daughter, wife and mother and yearns for something other than domesticity. She is highly critical of Curtis’ occupation as a teacher (“overqualified and underpaid”) and is constantly irritated by her husband’s habits. Tess is a self-centred woman who desperately wants out of the marriage to see what she could evolve into. She believes that Curtis will be there for her afterward. Tracey portrayed Tess’ selfish character that was quite unlikeable very successfully to the audience.

Initially I found myself feeling sorry for downtrodden Curtis, with his gentle manner and complacency. However, his immediate behaviour following the separation sparks some controversy, as Paul effectively expands his character’s complexity by swiftly entering the dating scene to be with a significantly younger woman. His actions suggest that an amicable separation might be unlikely, and his pointed, hurtful remarks towards Tess diminish my sympathy for him.

 

 

The split is a catalyst for Annie, a masseuse and Bonnie, a high-end art dealer, to suddenly explore their own relationship. Bonnie’s warm and younger partner Annie, who feels Bonnie’s condescending words deeply, was played with a sweet, quiet strength by Chantal.

Karen’s character Bonnie had a mix of forthrightness and vulnerability. Kudos to Karen who held the stage with convincing conviction – Bonnie was a standout character to me.

There’s a recurring reference to and even a custody battle for Tess and Curtis’ tantalus, a wooden lockable stand, which holds whiskey and is inaccessible without a key, to keep it safe from children or from servants in the old days. This heirloom is a gentle representative of how Tess feels, alluding to the Greek myth of Tantalus, who was eternally tempted by food and water just out of reach.

Director Kerrie King’s set was simple and effective, showing two living rooms side by side, their own spaces represented and separated by the use of different coloured walls and furniture. Lighting designer Wayne Chee and Lighting Operator Thomas Van der Plaat highlighted the rooms and characters well, bringing attention to where it was needed. Sound Design and Operator Walter Opdam’s choice of music brought the right atmosphere to the play, especially with his choices of songs such as George Michael’s “Freedom” as Tess was dancing and singing on the couch, and a song I’d never heard about IKEA as Tess attempted (and failed) to put together something from IKEA, after boasting to her friends that she never wanted to have anything personal again!

“Three Little Words” is a portrait of the aftermath of a breakup, of how the dissolving of one couple’s marriage affects their friends unexpectantly. How the dynamics of situations change in ways that are unpredictable because we are human. It is certainly a thought-provoking play, but not a play that is completely sad. In parts yes, but this clever script was laden with so many light moments sprinkled in, delivered by the characters’ wry and quick dialogues which made me and the audience laugh often, and quite a lot!

I loved the Elanora Players’ production of Three Little Words! Perhaps those Three Little Words from the title may have been “I See You” or Annie’s wisdom of “It’s About Kindness”. Or maybe it is meant to mean something else altogether; the audience can make up their own minds and there is creative beauty leaving it like that.

“Three Little Words” run time: approximately 90 minutes, with a 20 minute interval
Jan 9 – Jan 17 2026 at North Narrabeen Community Centre, 2-10 Woorarra Avenue, North Narrabeen
www.elanoraplayers.com.au

To book tickets to Three Little Words, please visit https://elanoraplayers.com.au/.

Spread the word on your favourite platform!

Much Ado About Nothing

Much Ado About Nothing

Much Ado About Nothing Rating

Click if you liked this article

1

This Much Ado About Nothing is set on the South Coast in the week before Christmas, and the choice is not cosmetic. From the moment Don Pedro, Claudio and Benedick enter wheeling a battered esky, the world is established: this is a family gathering, loud, sunburnt, faintly daggy, and thick with history. The cicadas hum, So Fresh Summer Hits blare, and the audience—seated in the round, sometimes beside the actors themselves—is folded directly into the social fabric of the play.

The production leans into deliberate dagginess. Costumes are bright, mundane, occasionally ugly. The set is minimal: a Christmas tree, a party table, a CD player, tinsel slung over exits. Popular music and unpolished dancing create the feeling of a real holiday gathering rather than a theatrical abstraction. In a space this small, there is nowhere to hide—and the production knows it.

Theo Rule’s Benedick is an Australian bloke we recognise instantly. His loud vows of eternal bachelorhood are funny because they’re defensive, half-brag and half-shield. What makes the performance quietly impressive is the vulnerability Rule allows in. As Benedick overhears that Beatrice may love him, the change is gradual, almost reluctant. Armour loosens in stages. Pauses lengthen. Hope creeps in. By the time Benedick acts, his earnestness feels earned, not performative.

Madison Chippendale, who also directs the production, gives Beatrice a different kind of armour. Her wit reads as learned self-protection, shaped by disappointment rather than disdain. When she overhears Benedick’s supposed love, curiosity flickers—but caution holds the line. Her later demand that he prove himself lands not as cruelty but principle. That insistence becomes the moral spine of the play, aligning directly with Benedick’s decision to believe Hero when others will not.

 

 

Andrea Magpulong’s Hero emerges slowly, but when she speaks there is no ignoring her. That restraint makes the wedding scene genuinely shocking. In such close quarters, Claudio’s public shaming feels brutally intimate. James Papadakis plays Claudio as someone painfully familiar: good-natured, not too bright, easily led. His cruelty comes not from malice but weakness, which makes it harder to excuse.

James Yeargain’s doubling of Don Pedro and Don John is smartly executed, though the production’s trimmed structure means Don John’s plot is never fully resolved. This Much Ado prioritises emotional truth over narrative closure, and that trade-off is visible.

The true heart of the production lies in the Beatrice and Benedick scenes. Calling it “chemistry” is inadequate. What plays is collision—two guarded people meeting at force. Love doesn’t bloom here; it crashes.

There is something quietly principled in these choices. Shakespeare did not write for high culture; he wrote for crowded rooms, for people eating, drinking, laughing, and sometimes being cruel to one another. Chippendale’s direction understands this instinctively. By embracing the familiar — the bad taste, the pop music, the awkward dancing, the Christmas rituals everyone recognises — the play is returned to its natural habitat. In this exposed, communal space, the language doesn’t arrive as something precious, but as something overheard. And that is where it belongs.

To book tickets to Much Ado About Nothing, please visit https://www.trybooking.com/events/landing/1493684.

Photographer: Jamie Simmons

Spread the word on your favourite platform!

Opera For The Uninformed: In The Presence of Light

In The Presence of Light

In The Presence of Light Rating

Click if you liked this article

There’s something rather intimate about being invited to a dress rehearsal of a show. The creatives are milling around you buzzing in nervous excitement. The show is still in bits and pieces on the floor, not yet solid. The world they’ve created is in its teenagehood — not infant in its conceptualism, but not yet fully grown. You feel much like a wildlife photographer, sitting, observing, noticing, but still distinctly on the outside; our presence as critics is both cruelly invasive and fundamentally necessary. In The Presence of Light was my first dress rehearsal invitation, and it offered me entirely new parts of the critic’s experience. Principally, I got to feel how the show was actively coming together around me, and I got to ask a little about what I was walking into.

Spark Sanders-Robinson, creative-lead and the only live speaking (and singing) voice says, when I confess to her I have no experience writing for opera, that this experience is “opera for the uninformed” — that is, it is an operatic experience for those who don’t want to be spoken down to, but instead connected with. She tells me the experience is a deliberation of love, an exploration of what it is in its truest form, instead it being trapped within the bonds of the human experience.

“It’s about death,” she says, then, when Mia Rashid, their dancer prompts, “is it about death?” she responds, “no. It’s about love.” I am, admittedly, prepared for the experience to be completely incomprehensible after this conversation. I have never been so glad to be proven right.

We are tucked into the M2 Gallery in Surry Hills — an itty bitty space, unconventional, echoey, with what almost looks like a frame surrounding the elevated platform this team is using as a stage. The “stage” is bare, ‘cept for a white sheet at the back. Robinson wears a flowy, airy, blue wrap dress — which, with Rashid’s simple white tulle, almost shapeless dress, creates an eerie dreamlike atmosphere, allowing them to become one with the space around them. The space itself is generally unsupportive, and I look up to the ceiling to see what they will do with lighting, because there’s certainly no view-blocking from-home lights milling about. On the floor, there sits a singular projector, surrounded by indistinguishable frames I don’t yet understand. Nathaniel Kong joins us in the room, sits behind the piano.

I ask, upon finding out that Robinson and Rashid will be the only two interacting on stage: “is it a two-hander?” Robinson responds, “kinda a two-hander. Unless you count the piano as a third character.”

We begin.

Recorded responses from what must be over ten or fifteen people fill the room with their overlapping responses, talking about what it is that they love. Although each answer is interesting and beautiful, we cannot catch a single one as they become jumbled and chaotic. Robinson takes the stage and the glow of her projector light snaps on as she begins to talk to the audience (me and their photographer, mind you) about what she defines as love. Or rather, how difficult she finds love to define. She leaves us on a rumination about the use of defining it at all, and the lights go out. Rashid replaces her on stage, taking us through the first of many classical pieces of music in the show. Her movements are wide and grounded, translating the impossible hugeness of love, what it is as a force of nature. Then, as she connects to its fragility and its grief, they go miniscule and wineglass-thin in turn.

Robinson is generally well-known for her use and manipulation of light, no different in this production. Indeed, what makes this light work so interesting across Robinson’s catalogue is the matter in which it interacts with itself, as well as the people on stage. As Rashid becomes something more human, she catches and releases the light in her hand, and love goes from being something that possesses and consumes her, to something akin to hope, a slight glimmer. Different frames of colour over the projector take us from softer yellows, to bright, high-contrast whites that throw sharp, dangerous shadows behind Robinson. Then, as our dancer rejoins us, she is bathed in a pink light that makes her almost inhuman. It is at this moment I understand the deliberation about the piano. Kong and Rashid seem to not just legitimately communicate, but have entire conversations through the call and response of music and dance. Later, when Robinson’s mezzo-soprano rings out through the almost-empty room, I remember this relationship in its more traditional form as the opera and the orchestra interact, representing entire sections through these two individuals.

 

 

As a production, I cannot tell you that there was an overlapping narrative to this piece. Rather, it functioned as a series of images, more performance art or a film sequence than a piece of theatre. In one moment, shadow puppets creep over the projector, two faces in profile, then meet in the middle for a kiss. Rashid collapses in between them, bathed in, yet shadowed by their love. To that point, the piece doesn’t attempt to ask or answer something, it invites you to feel the full scope of an emotive experience in all its beauty and wickedness. The performers are all viscerally facing something through their chosen art form, and the size of the space as well as the passion of their performances makes the whole experience incredibly intimate. In Rashid’s rare moments of pause, we can hear the heaving of her breath. In between Robinson’s clear notes, we can feel the sound still bouncing around the room. The body-ness of it all provides us with the raw erotic lens of their conversation.

In a technique I’ve certainly never seen before, a glass bowl is placed over the projector, and Robinson and Rashid take turns dripping water, oil, and ink into it, throwing curling and whispering colour across the stage, bleeding and changing the light. As both performers are in white or almost-white, these moments of colours stain not just the background, but them as well. In one particularly effective moment, an explosion of purples appear across Robinson’s body on stage, as ink is dripped into the centre of the bowl.

In many ways, our fourth character is the continued reappearance of the voices. Although jumbled and confusing through the beginning, they spread out and become clearer. We listen to them talk about their lived experience of love, of grief, of heartbreak, of redemption, of life. This tether of realism affirms the path of images we tiptoe through, as well as providing an edge of human vulnerability to the piece that can sometimes escape a performer.

Although I was invited to the dress rehearsal, I must briefly play the part of the wicked critic and remind the world that no art can be perfect. Indeed, the performance as a whole was brilliant, and my only moments of nitpicking are as follows. Robinson, despite being an incredible mezzo-soprano and having strong monologues, has moments of struggling to sit in her body and relaxing. This, when compared with how viscerally one must be in their body as a dancer, is thrown into rather sharp contrast next to Rashid. Further, each of the three performers had moments of sneaking worried glances at one another, which although can be understood as working through the anxieties and uncertainties of dress rehearsal, manifested as drops in concentration through the show. However, other than this, I truly cannot fault anything else. The light work was inspired and beautifully done; Robinson’s performance both as an actor and a singer was beautiful;, Rashid took my breath away as a dancer; and Kong brought old music to new light through his work on the piano. The last moments of the show, a Joni Mitchell cover, floated through the more conceptual work of the rest of the piece and touched base with the audience, giving us a tether to hold onto even as the stage swan with an iris of pink spinning light.

In a topic so broad and difficult to fathom such as love, sometimes connecting to the conceptual and visual serves the explorative process more than the grounded and naturalistic ever could. In The Presence of Light shows its audience that the emotional experience is not a logical one, but a visual and physical one, and if we can embrace letting go of our need to understand, we, ironically, come much closer to knowing what that emotion truly is. The team, in this tucked away gallery, have in a way presented something that matched my early anxieties of being incomprehensible. But then, can’t we say the same thing about love itself?

To book tickets to In The Presence of Light , please visit https://www.lightsontheatre.com/.

Photographer: Samuel Herriman

Spread the word on your favourite platform!

Tagi o Le Text-Based-Performance-Artist! : Working Class Clown

Working Class Clown

Working Class Clown Rating

Click if you liked this article

1

Mmmmmm… conceptual. Such was the tagline of Tommy Misa’s seventy-five minute exploration into grief and culture, Working Class Clown. And yet, what was immediately impressive about the piece, is that it wasn’t. Not really. The show, although tackling conceptual ideas, used Samoan clowning and a deep and grounded connection to the mundanity of life to traverse those ideas with an empathetic intelligence and humour that made sure it never flew too unreachably high into cerebralism. In the towering industrial theatres of Carriageworks, a stage set with what upon first glance looks like nothing more than a pile of leaves and towering poles is nestled. Against the concrete backdrop, they seem almost out of place as natural objects, which, in many ways, becomes the point.

As the piece opened, Misa’s performance strengths became immediately obvious. Misa moved like a dancer, each micro-adjustment fluid and controlled; a charismatic performer with an easy sensuality that spoke to the argument of the piece. Every emotion, confusion, grief, excitement, happiness, sat firmly in his body as the narrator took us through one of the early Samoan myths of creation. As he joined us in the modern day, we were gifted with the stunningly effective costume design of Katie-Louise and Lilian Nicol-Ford, an oversized blue linen shirt and pants that effortlessly elevated Misa’s physical work on stage. This was accentuated once more by Amber Silk’s lighting design, done so well and concentrating each moment so deliciously that I am officially converted against the lights-up lights-down shows I once championed.

As we moved into the modern day, the piece took on its more grounded, honest edge. We joined Misa in line for Centrelink, and felt both their boredom and desperation as the system once again ignored them. Both we, the audience, and Tommy, the performer, coped with this ignoring of our needs through laughter. In front of our eyes, Tommy became the disinterested government worker, the eastern suburb white friend who can never truly understand what poverty feels like, and the teachers who turned their nose up instead of reaching out with understanding.

Each moment, when scratched just beyond the surface of humour relays a tragic institutional truth about our society, and yet, when faced with the reality of what little those of us who are ignored by the system can do about it, our only choice is to laugh. Laughter, in a sense, was the thesis of the piece. Can we decolonize ourselves through laughter? Can we use it to move through grief? Can we use it to heal?

 

 

Another significant throughline of the piece was language. Like many, growing up in primary and high school in Sydney, I was told that most indigenous languages in Australia and the Pacific were either dead, or mostly dead. The hidden underlying message of that wording being, there’s no use bothering to try and save them. Working Class Clown disproved this with a grin and audience participation. As the sole performer on stage, the audience, in many ways, became the secondary character, and our interaction was done almost entirely within the framework of the Samoan language. Through the comedy of the text, and the mass of people learning at the same time, one thought came immediately to my mind: this isn’t that hard. And so I return to comedy as a tool of decolonization.

Perhaps the tragedy of high school and university history classes had told me that imperialism was simply too great a power to ever contend with, but here, in this room of strangers, imperialism showed its delicate white underbelly and revealed to us its weakness of empathy. This also connected us intimately to the culture being explored on stage, and allowed us to almost grieve as a collective, and in turn, provide Misa with the safe space to be as vulnerable as he was.

As a performer, Misa continued to impress. His vocal work was deliberate, and controlled right down to the breath work, which we heard perhaps too much of at the level his mic was set at. Their comedic timing and character work remained a highlight of the show experience, and his subtle shifts into the emotional lowpoints of the script once again proved to me the power of the double-sided coin of comedy and tragedy. Further, the piece sat very culturally inside Sydney, which was a welcome change from the more conceptual shows on the market which are set more inside an “idea” than a place. Towards Misa’s more emotional moments, he did briefly fall into rhythmic traps which leaned more demonstrative than legitimately emotive, however with the content being discussed, I couldn’t truly fault them. It also didn’t stop every emotional moment from giving me full body goosebumps, as we watched legitimate emotions sit just behind the emotional guard of performing.

Lighting also continued to show off, both with moments of individual spotlight, and particularly memorable moments of the lights coming up on us as the audience, forcing us to participate. Another highlight was the voice-message from Gussy, played by Imbi, which was performed beautifully, and gave Misa the break they needed to create the emotional high that would carry them for the rest of the show. However, I must admit my favourite moment, one that brought me fully to tears, was Misa’s retelling of a family in line for housing – which they don’t get – and the gifting of a dandelion from the family’s oldest son to his exhausted mother.

A one-man show is a challenge, it gives you no one to rely on but yourself, and it was here that one of the only two true weaknesses of the show appeared. At a smattering of points throughout the show, Misa began to say something and then rapidly changed direction, which left the sentence not quite making sense. This came to a head as a line drop, which although is not a crime in and of itself, did manifest as a drop in confidence which affected the later half of the show. This, however, I am empathetic about. It is difficult enough to learn a part in an ensemble piece, where there are people on stage that can bail you out. A one-man show is an entirely different beast, and this show was almost half an hour longer than the others I’ve seen this year.

A truly mammoth amount of content for a singular performer. The piece’s second, and truly I believe only other flaw, was that although it made interesting points, the connective tissue between those points was often weak. This problem was much less noticeable in the first half of the piece, but towards the end, as the script tried to fit more and more ideas into itself in dwindling time, the jumps became more and more distinct – which caused confusing pivots between emotional states that didn’t quite make sense. However, each individual idea on its own was well fleshed out and conceptually impressive, even as the larger cohesiveness of the argument began to warp.

Easily the most impressive portion of the show was watching Misa, and then Misa and some brave volunteers from the audience who weren’t wearing wobbly heels like I was, build the world in front of us. This began with Misa building a puppet in real time out of paper, which was used beautifully to represent his child self. However, the second, and more impressive example, was the building of the home. The section began with one of the rawest displays of vulnerability I’ve ever seen on stage, as the lights came up on all of us whilst Misa honestly asked for help to lift the roof onto the poles he’d placed down.

As the home came together, the emotion hidden behind those guardrails of performance crept to the surface, and as the sunset behind the home was created, both Misa and their audience were left in a choked awe (and admittedly misty-eyed). Indeed, it became never-more clear than in that moment that we weren’t just watching a character work through something, but Misa himself process his grief in front of us.

Working Class Clown functions spectacularly as an exploration of grief through comedy and culture, and although it trips on minor faults of performance and argument, as a cohesive experience, it was an incredibly impressive piece of theatre. Each element was well considered and equally well executed, and I left with both a true sense of emotional catharsis, and a deeper understanding of a culture that I hadn’t had the chance to learn much about.

To book tickets to Working Class Clown, please visit https://performancespace.com.au/whats-on/tommy-misa.

Photographer: Joseph Mayers

Spread the word on your favourite platform!